There has been a good bit of talk in the blogosphere over the past couple of weeks about the election of a new President of the Southern Baptist Convention. As you no-doubt know, there are many who have been seeking to build bridges between the Calvinist and Arminian factions within the Convention. Monday's "debate" between Paige Patterson and Al Mohler was an indication of the willingness of men on both sides of the divide to affirm their mutual respect and admiration.
As is so often the case, much of the discussion between the two factions deals with the subject of evangelism. It is a common charge levelled against Calvinists that Reformed doctrine somehow reduces the desire to share the gospel with the lost. Whether fairly or unfairly, Calvinists are notorious for their lack of evangelism.
This is not a fair charge and I believe that, in many ways, Arminian churches can be every bit as lax in their efforts to evangelize. I would go so far as to say that millions of Americans, sitting in Evangelical churches week after week, have never been evangelized. The reason for this is that too many believers do not understand the difference between outreach and evangelism. Efforts have been made to reach out to unbelievers and they may even have been drawn in to a church, but without ever hearing the gospel message.
Every Christian should agree on the necessity of reaching out to the world with the Good News of Jesus Christ. Through history some Christians and some groups of Christians have placed more emphasis on this than others, but nearly all have agreed on its importance. In the English language we have two terms that are often used synonymously to describe the sharing of the Good News - evangelism and outreach. In this article I would like to address the difference between outreach and evangelism, for I believe we often confuse the terms. We often feel that we have fulfilled the Lord's command to preach the gospel through evangelism, when in reality we have been involved in outreach. While both are noble pursuits and can bring honor to God, it is evangelism that best fulfills His command to take the Good News to all the world.
Evangelism
e-van-gel ( -v n j l)
n.
1. The Christian gospel.
2. An evangelist.
[Middle English evaungel, from Late Latin vangelium, from Greek euangelion, good news, from euangelos, bringing good news : eu-, eu- + angelos, messenger.]
The root of the word evangelism, evangel, is derived from the Greek word euangelion which is translated good news. From that same word, we derive the word gospel. We find also that many words we use in English are in reality synonymous - evangel(ism), gospel and good news all speak of the same thing and find their root in the same word. They speak of the act of spreading the gospel and to the content of the message that is given. This is an important point to note - they refer both to the method and the message.
The word euangelion is found in many places throughout the New Testament. "The term is often used to express collectively the gospel doctrines; and 'preaching the gospel' is often used to include not only the proclaiming of the good tidings, but the teaching men how to avail themselves of the offer of salvation, the declaring of all the truths, precepts, promises, and threatenings of Christianity." It is termed "the gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24), "the gospel of the kingdom" (Matt. 4:23), "the gospel of Christ" (Rom. 1:16), "the gospel of peace (Eph. 6:15), "the glorious gospel," "the everlasting gospel," "the gospel of salvation" (Eph. 1:13)." (Easton Illustrated Dictionary)
In the Elwell Evangelical Dictionary we read specifically about Paul's application of the term which he used over 60 times and is found in every one of his letters except for Titus. "Paul's ministry was distinctively that of the propagation of the gospel. Unto this gospel he was set apart (Rom. 1:1) and made a minister according to the grace of God (Eph. 3:7). His special sphere of action was the Gentile world (Rom. 16:16; Gal. 2:7). Since Paul accepted the gospel as a sacred trust (Gal. 2:7), it was necessary that in the discharge of this obligation he speak so as to please God rather than man (I Tim. 2:4). The divine commission had created a sense of urgency that made him cry out, "Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel" (I Cor. 9:16). For the sake of the gospel Paul was willing to become all things to all men (I Cor. 9:22-23). No sacrifice was too great. Eternal issues were at stake. Those whose minds were blinded and did not obey the gospel were perishing and would ultimately reap the vengeance of divine wrath (II Cor. 4:3; II Thess. 1:9). On the other hand, to those who believed, the gospel had effectively become the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16)."
We can find insight into what the gospel means to Christians through the words of William Tyndale, who was a great English Reformer and Bible translator. To him it signified "good, mery, glad and ioyfull tydinge, that maketh a mannes hert glad, and maketh hym synge, daunce, and leepe for ioye." It truly is Good News!
Evangelism is more than telling people that Jesus loves them or that He died for them. It is telling people that they have offended a Holy God and stand before Him as condemned sinners. It is sharing with them that the good news, the best news of all, is that Jesus died for that very type of person. Jesus died to reconcile those condemned individuals to this God of justice. It is sharing with people that through faith they can be saved and can avoid an eternity of suffering for their offense to God. The Good News can only be understood in context of the bad news. If people do not understand the bad, if they do not realize that they are repugnant to God, befouled by their sin, they can not understand just how good the Good News is!
Outreach
Unlike evangel, the term outreach is not found in the Bible, though the idea certainly is. Outreach implies action more than message. Perhaps it is best defined as a business term: "an act of reaching out, bringing an organization's services or products out into the community." When a church engages in outreach, it is reaching out to the community in order to meet needs or to let people know of its existence. The Salvation Army is an excellent example. When tragedy strikes, especially in the case of natural disasters, the Salvation Army is often on the scene, providing food, clothing and other necessities. The Southern Baptist Convention does much the same as we saw in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Local churches in my hometown have some excellent outreach programs. For example, every year our town has a festival in a park down on the shores of Lake Ontario and one church brings in a climbing wall and allows all the children to scale the wall for no cost. This is an act of love by the church and allows people to make a connection with the church - a connection they hope will eventually draw people into fellowship. They see this as a selfless act and an act of grace as they give people something for nothing. So often people are shocked that a church would do this, for this activity usually represents the only activity in the entire festival that costs nothing. And so the church reaches out to people to give them an opportunity to see Christians in action and to learn about the church.
This is outreach. Unbelievers are given a glimpse of the love of Christ through believers. Believers take their love for the lost into the community and allow them to see changed hearts in action. There is usually nothing offensive about outreach, and it is often regarded as noble, even by those who are opposed to Christ.
The Great Commission
Jesus' final words to His disciples, the foundation upon which His church would be built, were "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." This "Great Commission" was given by our Lord to direct the actions of His church from the moment of its birth until He comes again to bring it to Himself. Jesus' words imply not outreach, but evangelism. We are to go to all nations and share this awe-inspiring message with people of every nation, race and creed. We are to share the full truth of the gospel. Needless to say, we can only share such news with our words. Our actions are important and should not be under-emphasized, but people are not saved by actions - they are saved by this message which holds the power to convict men's hearts.
1 Corinthians 1:21 tells us "it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe." This speaks both of the method, which is preaching, and the message, which is the Gospel. When we share the Gospel, then, we share a message that is offensive to the natural human mind. No human likes to be told that he has offended God and stands before Him as a condemned man. No human, in and of himself, would humble himself before this God and seek repentance. It is only through the power of God through the message of the Gospel that people can be saved, for God has ordained that He will work through this message to save His people. God uses this seemingly foolish and offensive message to reach people's hearts and turn them to Him.
When we evangelize, we share this message in all its offense, for in the offense of the Gospel there is power! When we remove the offense, we remove the power.
Outreach vs. Evangelism
There is clearly a significant difference between outreach and evangelism. They are both noble actions and bring honor to God. It is important to realize, and this should be clear through the descriptions, that they are not synonymous. The greatest difference is that evangelism is primarily a message while outreach is primarily an action.
We should note that there may be an important link between outreach and evangelism. Often times we reach out to people to draw them into a place where we can evangelize to them. We may provide children with an opportunity to have fun so that we can invite their parents to come to our church where we will take the opportunity to share the Good News with them. It is the hope of any believer that his actions will cause others to realize he is somehow different and convict that person so he can ask what makes the believer different.
Conclusion
It is important that we do not confuse outreach with evangelism. Jesus gave His church, the body that He valued so highly He gave His life for it, a commission to go to the world and share the Good News of what He did. Every believer is responsible before God to do this - we are to tell others of their condition and to share with them God's remedy. This can only be done through evangelism, through sharing the evangel which God uses to draw His people to Himself.
Don Whitney likens the evangelist to a mailman. The mailman has fulfilled the obligation of his job when he has delivered the mail to me. The measure of success in his job is to carefully and accurately deliver the message. How I respond to the letters I receive is none of his business. And the same is true of the evangelist. We have successfully evangelized when we have shared the Gospel. When we have carefully and accurately delivered the message of God, we can trust that we have pleased our Father. The message is delivered not through outreach, but through evangelism. It is simple enough to attract people to a message through outreach, and we can gather a large group of people through simple outreach, but we may not have evangelized them, even if they fill the pews of our churches.
Do you wish to fulfill our Lord's great commission? Then go boldly, sharing this foolish, offensive gospel message, knowing that it carries in it the very power of God. Trust and believe that in so doing you are bringing honor to our Lord and Savior and doing your part to build His Kingdom. Reach out to the lost, but ensure that you always leave them with the message of the gospel. Actions may draw them, but words are necessary to convey the message through which God saves His people.
Comments (58) »
1. Jeff Fuller
June 14, 2006
11:03 AM
Quote: “Efforts have been made to reach out to unbelievers and they may even have been drawn in to a church, but without ever hearing the gospel message.”
I’m still wondering why we are trying to be fishers of men by simply casting our nets in our own bathtubs? Is going to a church building prerequisite to hearing the gospel message? Thankfully there are still many who preach open air in their communities and [verbally] witness to strangers throughout their daily lives.
2. Cody W
June 14, 2006
11:26 AM
As a Southern Baptist I have watched the proceedings of the convention closely. I wish I could be more hopeful of the building of bridges between Calvinists and Arminians, but I have not really seen any attempts other than the pseudo-debate between Patterson and Mohler.
I realize this is not the substance of your post, but the election I believe really has almost nothing to do with Calvinist vs. Arminian and more to do with evangelism. It just so happens that the loudest bloggers in our convention happen to be Reformed.
I think that the election was swayed by young leaders who have been disillusioned by the evangelism and discipleship of the old guard. My hope for the SBC is that there will be a reformation of our ideas or evangelism and the converts it produces.
3. Dallas Pymm
June 14, 2006
11:26 AM
Great stuff Tim.
“The Good News can only be understood in context of the bad news. If people do not understand the bad, if they do not realize that they are repugnant to God, befouled by their sin, they can not understand just how good the Good News is!”
“When we evangelize, we share this message in all its offense, for in the offense of the Gospel there is power! When we remove the offense, we remove the power.”
What did you have for breakfast Tim? I will take two. This was excellent. At my former church I have never heard of anyone actually telling someone where they currently stood with God as part of the gospel message. This is such a tragedy. If there is no offense, then there is no good news. Why would we need Christ if we looked great to God? Great points here Tim. Thanks for this.
4. donsands
June 14, 2006
11:27 AM
Man, this was a excellent lesson. Thanks Tim. I sent it to my pastors.
p.s. I believe the body is made up, of outreachers and evangelists. We need one another, in order to bear fruit, though it’s always God who gives the increase. Easier said then done. It takes a level of mayurity, and a constant focus on the Cross, from the foot of the Cross.
5. Bill Isley
June 14, 2006
11:31 AM
Tim—
Well said. Excellent differentiating point that I had never before appreciated.
Bill
6. Bill Isley
June 14, 2006
11:32 AM
Tim—
Well said. Excellent differentiating point that I had never before appreciated.
Bill
7. Tim Challies
June 14, 2006
11:39 AM
“What did you have for breakfast Tim?”
Frosted Flakes. I don’t recommend them but they were on sale…
8. Dan S.
June 14, 2006
12:22 PM
Great work, Tim! I had never really thought much about that distinction between outreach and evangelism. Could it be that what people term as “friendship evangelism” or” lifestyle evangelism” is really just outreach, and only becomes evangelism when they actually use words (written or spoken) to present the Gospel?
9. Wendy West
June 14, 2006
12:32 PM
Tim
I concur with the thanks for distinguishing between outreach and evangelism. The article was excellent. Wendy
10. Tim Challies
June 14, 2006
12:59 PM
“Could it be that what people term as “friendship evangelism” or” lifestyle evangelism” is really just outreach, and only becomes evangelism when they actually use words (written or spoken) to present the Gospel?”
Very possibly, yes. I would say that most evangelism begins as outreach. But by distinguishing between these terms we won’t go home feeling that we’ve done what God commands when all we’ve actually done is “reach out” without actually sharing the gospel.
11. debtor2grace
June 14, 2006
1:37 PM
As someone who’s a beginning church planter, I really took interest int he article. I used to be very “rough” as far as evangelism goes: tell everyone you feel led to tell that they are sinners in dire need of salvation which come sonly through Jesus. There’s nothign wrong witht hat, except I never took the time to actually attempt to build any type of relationship with the people to whom I was evangelising. I realize sometimes that’s impossible, but I believe evangelism includes the love of God and the wrath of God. I am all for outreach. We call this “pre-evangelism” in church planting. However, many churche sare getting them interested, but not telling them the whole truth.
I heard one author say: “What you win them with is what you win them to”. If we’re simply winning to fun and games and no dress code and sermonettes then we’ve failed. However, if we use those things as minors to actually get them to hear the majors, I can go for that.
12. debtor2grace
June 14, 2006
1:38 PM
As someone who’s a beginning church planter, I really took interest int he article. I used to be very “rough” as far as evangelism goes: tell everyone you feel led to tell that they are sinners in dire need of salvation which come sonly through Jesus. There’s nothing wrong with that, except I never took the time to actually attempt to build any type of relationship with the people to whom I was evangelizing. I realize sometimes that’s impossible, but I believe evangelism includes the love of God and the wrath of God. I am all for outreach. We call this “pre-evangelism” in church planting. However, many churche sare getting them interested, but not telling them the whole truth.
I heard one author say: “What you win them with is what you win them to”. If we’re simply winning to fun and games and no dress code and sermonettes then we’ve failed. However, if we use those things as minors to actually get them to hear the majors, I can go for that.
13. r
June 14, 2006
2:33 PM
Excellent article! There is a differance and yet both are important to do as Christians, as both are given in word by our Lord and in example by HIm.
14. Steve Patterson
June 14, 2006
3:09 PM
Tim - Excellent post on a often misunderstood topic. You are right on regarding the difference between Outreach and Evangelism. Thank you for being dilligent to study and use your God-given gifts to serve others through your blog. I am forwarding this post to the men I have the privilege to serve alongside of in ministry, as well as others in our church.
Thanks again!
For the Gospel,
Steve
15. Brian Thornton
June 14, 2006
3:19 PM
The White Horse Inn has an excellent discussion on this very topic, either on their 4/9 or 4/16 broadcast…I can’t remember which.
They make a great point that you won’t find much relationship building in the gospel presentations in Acts. The early church wasn’t concerned very much with whether or not the ones they were talking to liked them…they were too busy proclaiming the true gospel message: man stands condemned before a holy and just God who has appointed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness…but Jesus Christ, whom the prophets spoke of before hand, came and fulfilled all righteousness and died as a substitute for sinners, so that all who trust in Him alone for their salvation would receive forgiveness of sins.
Another thing to consider - which is opposite to the outreach-gospel, or social gospel - is that NO real relationship can be built except for that one which has Christ as its foundation.
There are many who believe that the real barriers to the gospel are social rather than theological…that is quite tragic, and has dire consequences on what types of message and methods is/are employed for evangelism.
16. Jamie
June 14, 2006
3:51 PM
Tim,
Thanks again for another great post.
For a great book on Evangelism from a Reformed perspective, check out Will Metzger’s “Tell the Truth: The Whole Gospel to the Whole Person by Whole People.” It’s on one of Mark Dever’s top ten lists. I read through it last year with a friend and plan on using it to teach a Sunday School class this Fall.
I highly recommend that you read it and post a review. Who knows you might just help sell a few more books.
17. GWilly
June 14, 2006
4:00 PM
Tim and others,
I live in the shadow of Paige Patterson and used to see him every day at work. I am very interested in reading a transcript of this debate. Do you know where I can find a direct link?
18. Dave
June 14, 2006
4:38 PM
Tim,
I appreciate your effort in this post and I think I see your main point. However, I think that there is a danger here in thinking that evangelism can’t be more closely linked to outreaches.
I am a missionary and the majority of outreachs that we do include a clear presentation of the gospel. They are evangelistic outreaches. One of these events is actually an ongoing ministry where a few guys play basketball with some kids at a local school with the intent of building relationships and sharing about Jesus. These kids have now heard several clear presentations of the gospel and are becoming more comfortable around us. Unfortunately, they have not responded to the gospel, nor have they received our invitations to attend regular services or youth group.
I’m not sure why it is important to make such a sharp distinction between the two terms. If you are saying that an event where a rock wall is used and nothing more than church invitations are given should not be called evangelism, then I agree. In fact, some in my church have referred to passing out invitations to services and concerts as “evangelism.” I cringe when I hear them say it. Still, I would consider my first example as evangelism in the context of a sports outreach. I don’t think it is the best way to evangelize, but it has given me the chance to witness to tens of young kids and I praise the Lord for it.
Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Thanks again for the post and giving me something to consider.
19. GWilly
June 14, 2006
4:58 PM
Found it myself (I work in a call center and maintain my sanity by surfing the web)
http://purechurch.blogspot.com/2006/06/rumble-in-jungle-thriller-in-manilla.html
20. donsands
June 14, 2006
8:25 PM
Brian,
“that NO real relationship can be built”
“The Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chains; … The Lord grant to him that he may find mercy from the Lord in that Day” 2 Tim. 1:16,18
I believe we can have meaningful relationships with unbelievers. Of course, I understand that Christian fellowship is different, but it seems the Apostle esteemed this unbeliever, and had a refreshing relationship with him.
Just a thought.
21. Brian Thornton
June 14, 2006
9:12 PM
Don, regarding Onesiphorus, you said:
but it seems the Apostle esteemed this unbeliever, and had a refreshing relationship with him.
I think it is a far stretch to go from what Paul says in these verses all the way to the conclusion that Onesiphorus was an unbeliever. In fact, later on in chapter 4 Paul requests that the household of Onesiphorus be greeted along with that of Prisca and Aquila, which leads me to believe that he was a believer.
Also, to take Paul’s request that Onesiphorus find mercy from the Lord as an indication that he was an unbeliever is to take Paul’s prayer in Ephesians for the saints at Ephesus in such a way as to consider them unbelievers as well…Paul said this: I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,
I still contend that there is no real relationship - with anyone - outside of Christ. One may have what he/she thinks is something meaningful, but, without Christ, it has no meaning.
22. debtor2grace
June 14, 2006
10:23 PM
>>>I still contend that there is no real relationship - with anyone - outside of Christ. One may have what he/she thinks is something meaningful, but, without Christ, it has no meaning.
23. 4ever4given
June 14, 2006
10:49 PM
Oh Mr. Challies,
This article was excellent, God-honoring …
“When we preach Christ crucified, we have no reason to stammer, or stutter, or hesitate, or apologize; there is nothing in the gospel of which we have any cause to be ashamed.” -Spurgeon
24. Ron Harvey
June 15, 2006
12:45 AM
First of all, Tim, wonderful point of view for clarification concerning “outreach” vs. “evangelism.”
Second, what took place on Monday at the SBC Pastor’s Conference was anything but a debate. It was a breakout session and the topic, which was nothing more than a discussion was, “Reaching the World for Jesus Christ Through Differing Views of Election.” Honest, that was the breakout title, I kid you not. Time would not have allowed for a debate and I don’t believe that Paige Patterson would allow himself to enter into a debating format. He is a smoozcher, not a debater. Dr. James White is a debater, seriously.
Third, you can get an audio of the discussion from www.sbctapes.com.
Fourth, you’re quite welcome.
25. Brian Thornton
June 15, 2006
8:21 AM
“So we cannot build meaningful evangel relationships with unbelievers? … I’d say I have REAL relationships with them.”
Question: What is the foundation for these relationships? What are they based upon? A relationship is based upon a connection…what is it that connects you to these unbelievers? If it is not Christ, then ultimately, it is meaningless, and has no real lasting value.
“I think that if I merely sat around thinking to myself that I can’t have a meaningful relationship with these people outside of Christ, as you suggest, they could detect this and there’d be NO opportunities to share my faith.”
There is nothing meaningful or mutual in this kind of ‘relationship’. Is it possible that they may want to truly be friends, but you are just looking for an opening…a way in to share your faith? That is kind of a ‘stealth’ relationship, isn’t it? Why is it that we have to look for ‘opportunities’ to share our faith? I don’t see that being how the early church did it. They just proclaimed Christ, regardless of what the effects on them were…and they didn’t wait until that had an ‘opportunity’ through the building of a false relationship.
“it’s awfully cold to think, for example, if tragedy befell one of them, it wouldn’t be “meaningful” enough for me to minister to them and show I care, all in the name and Spirit of Jesus.”
I said nothing ‘cold’ like this at all. What you are describing here is ministering to someone in a time of need, which we are commanded to do from Scripture.
The question still goes back to this: what is a relationship between a believer and unbeliever based upon? If it is NOT Christ, how then can it have any real meaning?
Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? -2 Cor. 6:14-15
26. donsands
June 15, 2006
8:22 AM
brian,
I feel I have to agree more with debtor2grace. But you do make a good point about Onesiphorus. I will have to study this a little. I always took it that he was a God-fearer, and not a Christian.
27. Tom M
June 15, 2006
8:56 AM
Well,
We need to understand that C vs A debates the mechanism of regeneration. The problem arises when we fail to notice that it is God that calls us to choose. I do not take the middle ground that many people trying to be popular do. I am a full 5 point Calvinist, but I understand the full argument of the Aminian. Frankly, a lot of the charges brought against Calvinism are either straw-man arguements or redifinitions by persons of the other camp.
Now, regarding this post, I have one thought: When our Outreach becomes a bait-and-swtich to evangelize, is that a problem? I think that in many cases it is being applied today, it is. Now, it can be done appropriately, but it is not the trend, particularly among megachurches.
All that being said, I do evangelize quite a bit. I am not ashamed of the Gospel. This is consistant with Calvinism because the Calvinist knows that he can not change a person, coerce a person, or otherwise make him a Christian. He also knows that the power to do that is in the word which is delivered in evangelism, thus, he gives the message and lets God sort it out with the person.
28. debtor2grace
June 15, 2006
9:39 AM
>>>There is nothing meaningful or mutual in this kind of ‘relationship’. Is it possible that they may want to truly be friends, but you are just looking for an opening…a way in to share your faith? That is kind of a ‘stealth’ relationship, isn’t it? Why is it that we have to look for ‘opportunities’ to share our faith? I don’t see that being how the early church did it.
29. Brian Thornton
June 15, 2006
11:27 AM
I think it is good to spend the energy and time to get to know lost people, develop real and meaningful relationships with them.
I still would be interested to hear the answer to my question of what the foundation of the relationship is with an unbeliever…and how is it “deep” and “real” without Christ being at the center of it?
Also, the characterization of coming out of a bubble only to proclaim the gospel has nothing to do with anything that I said. Statements like that and the one about me never having pastored (what that has to do with a discussion about what real relationships are based upon, I don’t know) lend credibility to my increasing conviction of why comments on blogs are, by and large, unedifying….yes, even my comments.
ANYONE out there want to actually answer the question I posed earlier???
If a “relationship” with someone has something OTHER than Christ as its basis…as its foundation…can it REALLY be meaningful? If it IS meaningful, in what sense is it? Can there be TRUE fellowship with an unbeliever? If so, then please explain what the fellowship is based upon, if not upon Christ.
If it cannot be truly meaningful, then is it not just our personal sentimentality and self-rationalization that is being used to make it right in our own minds? Where in Scripture do we see Christians having deep, real relationships with unbelievers (prior to their conversion)? And don’t try to use Jesus as an example, because his REAL fellowship and relationships were with his disciples (those who were true followers of Him). Sure, he ate with sinners and tax collecters, etc…but he invested His time and energy in His disciples - THAT is where his real and meaningful relationships were.
30. donsands
June 15, 2006
11:54 AM
How about Jesus and His disciple Judas?
31. Brian Thornton
June 15, 2006
11:58 AM
Here are some thoughts on this from John Gill, the pastor of the same church as Spurgeon, but 100 years before…in this quote he is commenting on Paul’s admonition in 2 Cor. 6:14 about believers and undbelievers:
And what communion hath light with darkness?
regenerate men are made light in the Lord; they are enlightened into their state and condition by nature, to see the exceeding sinfulness of sin, to behold the glory, beauty, fulness, and suitableness of Christ, so as to be sensible of their need of him, and to be able to look unto him for life and salvation; they are enlightened more or less into the doctrines of the Gospel, and the duties of religion; and their path is a shining light, shining more and more unto the perfect day. Unregenerate persons are “darkness” itself; they are dark and ignorant of God in Christ, of the way of salvation by Christ, of the work of the Spirit of God upon the heart, and of the mysteries of grace; they know not themselves, nor the sad estate they are in; they are born, and brought up in darkness worse than Egyptian darkness; they go on in it, and if grace prevent not, will be cast into utter and eternal darkness. Now, what “communion” can there be between persons so different one from another? for what is more so than light and darkness? these the God of nature has divided from each other; and they are in nature irreconcilable to one another, and so they are in grace.
32. debtor2grace
June 15, 2006
12:01 PM
>>>Where in Scripture do we see Christians having deep, real relationships with unbelievers (prior to their conversion)? And don’t try to use Jesus as an example, because his REAL fellowship and relationships were with his disciples (those who were true followers of Him). Sure, he ate with sinners and tax collecters, etc…but he invested His time and energy in His disciples - THAT is where his real and meaningful relationships were.
33. Brian Thornton
June 15, 2006
12:02 PM
How about Jesus and His disciple Judas?
Judas was not a random relationship…he didn’t just HAPPEN to be one of the twelve…he was CHOSEN for the very purpose of fulfilling prophetic Scripture…for the VERY purpose of being used by God to deliver over Christ into the hands of men.
I don’t think he can be used as an example of believers having fellowship with unbelievers. One of the twelve was a devil, specifically because it was God’s design for him to be there, to serve his pupose as the son of perdition (destruction).
34. Brian Thornton
June 15, 2006
12:07 PM
Dude, you’re the one missing the point.
You still have not answered the questions I have posed…your latest response is not in any way addressing the questions I have asked or the statements I have made.
35. Brian Thornton
June 15, 2006
1:21 PM
More thoughts on relationships with unbelievers from Matthew Henry (commenting on 2 Cor. 6:14):
II. The caution or exhortation itself, not to mingle with unbelievers, not to be unequally yoked with them, v. 14. Either, 1. In stated relations. It is wrong for good people to join in affinity with the wicked and profane; these will draw different ways, and that will be galling and grievous. Those relations that are our choice must be chosen by rule; and it is good for those who are themselves the children of God to join with those who are so likewise; for there is more danger that the bad will damage the good than hope that the good will benefit the bad. 2. In common conversation. We should not yoke ourselves in friendship and acquaintance with wicked men and unbelievers. Though we cannot wholly avoid seeing, and hearing, and being with such, yet we should never choose them for our bosom-friends.
36. donsands
June 15, 2006
3:12 PM
brian,
I see your point about Judas, but I will have to think on it for a while. Judas was with the Lord Jesus for three years, he was sent out with the other eleven. Mk. 3:13-19
How about: “I wrote to you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
Yet not altogether with fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must you needs go out of the world.” 1 Cor 5:9-10
37. Brian Thornton
June 15, 2006
3:37 PM
Don,
Good question about Paul’s comments at 1 Cor. 5. Let’s look at a little more of his comments in that passage:
I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually, wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.
I think, from a proper context, Paul here is speaking on the subject of the right and necessity of believers to make judgments on other believers based on their life compared to their profession. THAT is the subject of this passage.
Paul’s comments about having to go out of the world in order to avoid associating with sinners is hyperbole. He is making an exxageration to show the point that sinners are everywhere. He is speaking tongue in cheek…sarcastically. BUT, his reason for doing so is NOT to give instruction on how we are to associate with unbelievers…but how we are to make discerning judgments on other people who profess Christ.
Paul’s exhortation at 2 Cor. 6 is what I am interested in hearing people’s thoughts about…in relation to those who are light apparantly being able to have “deep” and “real” relationships with those who are darkness.
38. Vynette
June 15, 2006
9:15 PM
LOVE OR FEAR?
The only doctrine preached by Jesus and his discipes was love-love of God and love of fellow man.
Because love is basically spiritual, of greater depth than words, it permits of no doctrinalisation.
Love is a drawing power. If it is to be reciprocated, it can never be coerced.
Over the last two millennia, a large portion of humanity has been drawn to the New Testament values demonstrated by Jesus of Nazareth.
This drawing power has been capitalised upon by many of the leaders of organisational Christendom who hold their adherents in obedient chains through an invented doctrinal system of rewards and punishments.
I propose that the doctrines and teachings upon which they rely to maintain their authority over hearts and minds are utterly false and have no basis in the bible.
I propose that the simple and pure message of the New Testament has been obscured by layer upon layer of theological absurdity and complexity.
I propose that these doctrines and teachings conceal the fact that the same issues and principles portrayed in the New Testament are just as much alive today as they were in the time of Jesus of Nazareth.
I propose that, through this doctrinal system, the leaders of organisational Christendom have achieved, on an intellectual level, what their predecessor priests in Jerusalem had hoped to achieve on a physical level - THE DESTRUCTION OF THE MAN JESUS OF NAZARETH AND THE PRINCIPLES FOR WHICH HE LIVED AND DIED.
39. donsands
June 15, 2006
10:00 PM
Brian,
The main purpose i see Paul instructing here is to be seperate from any and all spiritual practices of the heathen. This would have been a huge concern in Corinth. Also marriage with unbelievers is surely meant here as well. And any sinful conduct of the unbelievers we are to be seperate from.
“Be not ye therefore partakers with them. For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light; … And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” Eph. 5: 7-11
I believe we, as children of the Father of lights can still become friends with unbelievers, but we must be strong in the Lord, and we must never compromise Pauls teachings here.
Paul also says, “I have become all things to all men, so that I might by all means save some”. 1 Cor 9:22 I think this denotes frienship.
Also: “For I wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethern, my kinsmen according to the flesh”. Rom. 9:4
I see Pauls passion for people. He loved people. And many were drawn to him. Many hated him as well. Paul would surely shake off the dust if needs be.
I believe we are called to do the same.
As children of God we have the most genuine and fulfilling relationship a human can achieve. However, I truly believe we can become friends with unbelievers.
As far as Judas goes.
I believe the Apostles were friends with one another, and Judas was included. Mark 3:13-19
40. Francisco
June 15, 2006
10:13 PM
Brian,
I can not have a “deep” relationship with an unbeliever. For example I can not fulfill James 5:16 with him. I can not make him my accountability partner.
To all,
I guess part of the discussion is that the world has coopted the meaning of the word “fellowship”. For the early church meant Acts 2:42. For the world and the worldly church means ONLY hanging out, drinking some beers and go fishing, etc. Some people hate the idea that a christian treat and unbeliever as “project”. I guess that is another “straw-man”. Any thoughts?
41. Brian Thornton
June 15, 2006
11:34 PM
I truly believe we can become friends with unbelievers.
As far as Judas goes.
I believe the Apostles were friends with one another, and Judas was included. Mark 3:13-19
Don, two things:
1. You may ‘believe’ that you can become friends with unbelievers, but what is that friendship based on? And what in Scripture gives you this belief (of course, this all depends on what you mean by ‘friends’)?
2. You may ‘believe’ that the apostles were friends (the passage you quoted hints at nothing of the sort)…I don’t see much in the way of evidence that the apostles were friends prior to the crucifixion. What I see is a lot of contending with one another about which of them was the greatest (they spent a lot of their time jockying with each other for position). Of course, after the resurrection and ascension and coming of the Holy Spirit…these guys were virtually inseparable…extremely close…but, what Scriptural support can you provide that they were “friends” prior to the crucifixion?
I STILL WOULD LIKE SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS FOR A FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN A BELIEVER AND NON-BELIEVER…
Don,
I assume you have ‘friendships’ with unbelievers…what are those friendships based upon?
42. dvdF
June 16, 2006
12:53 AM
Brian,
I do not think it is possible to have “deep” or “real” relationships with an unbeliever, but friendships that I have with unbelievers I can narrow down to these points
Love- I think that regardless of any set of circumstances, belief or unbelief, I still have love for all people.
Necessity- based entirely on circumstances, a co-worker for example, that are ongoing. I cannot be full of hate or dislike for people even though there IS a distance between us.
Hope- I maintain a friendship with a high school, fishing buddy in hope of the Holy Spirit working in his life.
these are what I see as the foundations of friendships with unbelievers, there may be others but I think they stem fom these
43. GWilly
June 16, 2006
12:15 PM
Vynette,
It seems like everyone in this forum has chosen to ignore your proposals. I hope you weren’t intentionally trying to be controversial. I think you would have received more response if you had listed specific examples of how many church leaders have deviated from the words of Scripture and the spirit of Christ (which, by the way, never contradict each other), which doctrines and teachings do you find unbiblical, or even which by which leaders you are offended.
Peace to you.
44. donsands
June 16, 2006
6:06 PM
brian,
One for instance: I am the coach of our church softball team. I have been playing for the past 15 years on and off. We play in a church league. It’s a good league, and the competition is good.
We have maybe 5 unbelievers on the team. I have befriended these young men. They like me and I like them. There is no hidden agenda’s. I am up front with the main reason we have this team. It’s for the honor of the Lord Jesus Christ, and to reachout in the world with the gospel.
Also we come together to have some fun. We all have had amny laughs. And thirdly, we play to win.
I could go on and on about many of the things we have in common.
Just yesterday I bumped into Steve, one of the players on the team at the gas station. We talked and as we departed, he asked me to pray for him, as he was traveling to South Carolina. I said you know I will. I pray he would one day come to the Cross, and we would then become brothers in Christ. But for now we are simply friends.
45. Vynette
June 16, 2006
7:05 PM
GWilly,
What I propose is that there is no biblical basis for the doctrines of ‘Miraculous Incarnation’ (Virgin Birth), ‘Trinity’, or ‘Transubstantiation’, or for the various teachings about the ‘divinity’ of Jesus of Nazareth.
No, I am not trying to be controversial or offensive merely trying to ‘prove all things’. If this, my duty, is offensive to some, then so be it.
Thus, my comments are directed to all Christian Church leaders who hold doctrines and theological hair-splitting to be more important than the simple message of Jesus of Nazareth.
And, yes, it is possible to demonstrate that the above doctrines are not based on either the Old or New Testaments but are a reflection of the ignorance of early church fathers as to Hebrew modes of thinking and expression.
After two millenia, it’s time for plain speaking.
Sincerely, Vynette
PS: I have issued a challenge to the Christian Churches to defend the aforementioned doctrines on my blog The Race is Run.
46. Emmett Manley
June 16, 2006
7:17 PM
“Why is it that we have to look for ‘opportunities’ to share our faith? I don’t see that being how the early church did it. They just proclaimed Christ, regardless of what the effects on them were…and they didn’t wait until that had an ‘opportunity’ through the building of a false relationship.” Brian T.
Brian, how does this work in your situation? How are you leading people to Jesus Christ in a way that completely avoids the hundreds of people that you develop relationships with in your business? You operate Yard Party Events (@ yardpartyevents.com, which I know since your website intructs those of us who read it to “check us out @…”), and have been “delivering inflatable fun since 1998”. I know you are a good witness of Christ through your work, since you post that “we pride ourselves on being dependable and friendly so your party will be easy and fun”, and then you put a great Bible verse (Colossians 3:17) in huge letters at the bottom of your site so that people will know that you belong to the Lord Jesus Christ, and that this is a Christian business. This sounds like an absolutely wonderful means to contact people and begin leading them toward Jesus Christ - I’ve always had that picture in my mind when I read your website. I cannot think of any better way to meet prospects and contacts that operating a “meet the public”, families and fun, mom, dad and the kids service business like yours - wonderful!
How could that not be an open door to talk to people who have met with unfriendly and undependable people all week, and are delighted to meet someone like you and your wife and your children, who are so different from the people that they normally meet in the world - it is rare today to find one who exhibits godly qualities like dependability and friendliness - frankly, when they do, people are stunned!? And they want to know - what makes you different? And they ask - give us the reason for the life, the hope, the difference in you. I know you would and do give excellent, scriptural answers to this. I know you have impacted these people for God, and surely some, probably many, have come to faith in Christ.
Surely in the hundreds and hundreds of events you’ve hosted since 1998, relationships have developed in the context of a party event which led to inviting these folks to church or to a home Bible study - relationships which preceded your joyfully sharing the Gospel with them, and then leading these families to Jesus Christ? And that those common humanity relationships are a wonderful lampstand for your witness to Christ and the gospel of grace.
I don’t understand - what could be wrong with this picture?
Or, in what other manner do you reach these folks? How do you “proclaim Christ” in isolation from these folks? And why do you characterize this all this as a “false relationship”?
I’ll be looking forward to your response - I really enjoy your website, but this one puzzles me…
47. Dallas Pymm
June 16, 2006
7:52 PM
Vynette, I would say the onus is yours to prove your claims before it would be ours. What is your Biblical proof to deny these things? With out such, why would any Christian engage in debating this with you?
48. Vynette
June 16, 2006
8:33 PM
Dallas,
Yes, I take up the burden, and the onus…
I am at this very moment ‘proving’ that these major doctrines of the Christian Churches are not based on the Bible.
My weblog , The Race is Run, exists for this purpose.
Topics include:
Yeshua Hanotzri or Jesus Christ
The Kingdom of God on Earth
Virgin Birth on Trial
Trinity on Trial
Divinity on Trial
Islam’s Fabled Qur’an
The Great Triad Mystery
Heaven and Hell…
Sincerely
Vynette
49. Brian Thornton
June 16, 2006
11:54 PM
Emmett,
I want to thank you for your incredibly thoughtful post. You have put forth some great questions,. and I want to be able to devote the time to answer you properly.
I will try to give you a response sometime Saturday afternoon in between my event setups for the day.
Thanks again for the questions, and I’ll be back soon to reply.
50. debtor2grace
June 17, 2006
8:00 AM
Brain, also I have the same questions Emmett has. How do you reconcile the attitude that all relationships w/ non-believers are not real and not meaningful w/ your day to day business and life?
Also, what about your children? They may not be believers at this moment, but isn’t your relationship w/ them real and meaningful?
51. Brian Thornton
June 17, 2006
3:53 PM
To Emmett, Don, debtor2grace, and others…let me first say that I have been asked quite a number of questions here as a result of my statements that there is no such thing as a real, meaningful, deep relationship outside of the common bond of Christ. Before I answer some of the questions posed by Emmett and debtor2grace, I would like to again ask the question that no one seems to be willing to answer, which is this: IF you (being a believer) have a relationship with an unbeliever, ON WHAT is that relationship based? What is the foundation that holds that relationship together?
Now, with as little rhetoric and emotion as possible, I will attempt to answer some of the questions put to me.
Let me say from the beginning that I think many are confusing acquaintance and surface-level association with relationship and fellowship.
Emmett’s questions:
How are you leading people to Jesus Christ in a way that completely avoids the hundreds of people that you develop relationships with in your business?
A - First of all, I have not developed any relationships within the course of conducting my business that are outside of Christ. However, I do have many aquiantances that have come about as a result of the business. But I do not consider them relationships, nor do I consider to be in fellowship with these people. The relationships that HAVE developed as a result of the business have come about due to a common faith in the one true Savior.
This [business] sounds like an absolutely wonderful means to contact people and begin leading them toward Jesus Christ - I’ve always had that picture in my mind when I read your website. I cannot think of any better way to meet prospects and contacts that operating a “meet the public”, families and fun, mom, dad and the kids service business like yours - wonderful!
How could that not be an open door to talk to people…
A - We operate our business unashamedly to the glory of God, never shying away from giving Him all the honor and credit for what He has done in our lives with this business. We are always ready to give a defense…a reason for the hope that is in us. But, we do not operate the business to be used as an evangelistic tool, or a means to contact people. In fact, we are SO open about the fact that we belong to Chrirst that there are probably many who do NOT call on us for our services because of that very reason. So, should I perhaps NOT be so open about my faith, so that more who are not saved might employ our services, thereby providing me with a platform to witness to them? I don’t think so.
in what other manner do you reach these folks? How do you “proclaim Christ” in isolation from these folks? And why do you characterize this all this as a “false relationship”?
A - Look…we (my wife and I) are not overtly on the offense in relation to evangelism - obviously, we are also NOT living secret Christian lives, for we openly name the name of Christ in all that we do. Quite frankly, neither I nor my wife have the gift of evangelism. My main gifts are teaching and discernment, which are geared toward those who already have faith in Christ. Pam is gifted in the areas of serving and ministering to children (she is an incredible storyteller). Does this mean I don’t have conviction to share my faith in a more agressive manner, no…I have been convicted more and more about that lately.
I just don’t see any benefit (or Scriptural precept) for investing time into building “relationships” with unbelievers. I certainly don’t see it as a pre-requisite for sharing the gospel to someone. In fact, I see just the opposite precept in Scripture regarding trying to have fellowship with those who walk in darkness.
debtor2grace asked:
How do you reconcile the attitude that all relationships w/ non-believers are not real and not meaningful w/ your day to day business and life?
A - Again, I think there is some misunderstanding over what a true relationship involves (fellowship), and what a mere aquaintance or surface-level association with someone is. Any business dealing with non-believers are just that…business dealings. Now, when they deal with us they will see - to the best of our ability and to the extent God has granted to us - our faith and even hear us talk about Christ in all that we do. But, we have no fellowship among those we do business with who do not share the common faith that we have in Christ…NO ONE else does either, or even can, no matter what people on this comment thread or elsewhere may say.
This is where I think we have seen a lot of emotional rhetoric concerning a hot button topic. It sounds mean when I say it is impossible to have a true, deep, real relationship with an unbeliever…but guess what, if you disagree with me…don’t get mad at me, that is plain teaching from Scripture. And if you think I’m wrong, then show me from Scripture where I am wrong. I’m open to correction, honest!
Also, what about your children? They may not be believers at this moment, but isn’t your relationship w/ them real and meaningful?
debtor, this is a whole ‘nother topic! Without getting too far into this one, we have Scriptural precepts for how do deal and interact with our children…by bringing them up in the discipline and admonition of the Lord. Theology will also play a big role in this as well. For example, Presbyterians consider children under the Covenant until such time as they deny that they are, or profess faith of their own accord. I am honestly not sure how Baptists are to view their children under credo-baptistic theology…and I’m a credo-baptist!!!
Anyway, for this discussion, I would prefer to stick with those assocations with which we have control in choosing, and to that end, would like to quote Matthew Henry again on this very topic:
Those relations that are our choice must be chosen by rule; and it is good for those who are themselves the children of God to join with those who are so likewise; for there is more danger that the bad will damage the good than hope that the good will benefit the bad. 2. In common conversation. We should not yoke ourselves in friendship and acquaintance with wicked men and unbelievers. Though we cannot wholly avoid seeing, and hearing, and being with such, yet we should never choose them for our bosom-friends.
Thanks for the questions, and God bles you both. I hope I haven’t made my position even more confusing. If so, please fire away and I will try to clarify.
Also, check out my latest post on my site at voiceofthesheep for more on this.
52. donsands
June 17, 2006
10:08 PM
Brian,
“ON WHAT”
With Steve, the softball player on my team, we have all the normal everyday things in common. He has a family. I have a family. He works and I work. We have a lot in common. We talk about the Lord as well.
I have a lot of relationships with unbelievers, and they all vary. Some are humanists. Some are Catholics. Some are religious, and some are not. Some are better friends then others.
Do we pray together in the Spirit? No. Do I pray for them? Yes. Some even ask me to pray for them.
Are my Christian friends more geuine friends? Yes and no. They are for sure more spiritual friends. But some unbelievers are close friends. The one thing we do not agree on is the gospel. They think I’m wrong. And that’s alright. But they are not offended; for what ever reason, I can not say. Others are offended, and I am not close to them, and they are not friends.
Some Christians are not friends. They are my eternal brothers and sisters, but they are actually not as close to me as some unbelievers.
If this is wrong, then I pray the Lord would put me staight. But this is how it is in my life. And that’s only the tip of the iceberg.
Have a wonderful Lord’s Day, worshipping the Father and His Son, Jesus Chriost. God bless.
53. debtor2grace
June 17, 2006
11:38 PM
I halfway think that “show me from the scriptures to prove me wrong” can be applied to everything from the color of the church carpet to the use of the word “Trinity”. As I read the Bible I look at the context of why something was written and to whom, etc. I made an “A” in hermeneutics :) The letters of Paul to the church often instructs beleivers on how to deal with one another. A few statements also tell believers how to relate to unebelievers as far as using discernment in these relationships. I don’t know of anyone (outside of AW Pink and John Gill…. very poor examples of relational pastors, though great theologians) who reads their Bible contexually and see that human beings were created to be relational people. Christians can have real and meaningful relationships with the lost. I see fathers and sons and mothers and daughters doing it. I’ve experienced it. As I stated, I thank God for a Chrisitan befriending me even though I cursed him and his wife and sought to destroy their faith numerous times…they bore with me and helped me along. Though they were praying for me together and I didn’t know it at that time, on the outside he found out I liked working out so he began doing the same. He found out I liked music so we began to fellowship around music. he wa salways careful to not let me pull him into sin and he was always careful to tell me the reason why he was doing anything for me and with me at all as far as friendship is concerned: to glorify God to someone who was way lost. I would have taken a bullet for them and them for me. For them it was to win me to Christ. I wasn’t a “project” to these people. They loved me and we had areal and meaningful relationship and even if I’d never have believed on Jesus (God forbid!) he would still be among my friends. This couple was careful to let me know there was a spiritual dimension that I wasn’t a part of. They were clear they enjoyed a fellowship with their fellow believers that I didn’t or couldn’t have. So I think we need to be careful before we dismiss “friendship evangelism” or whatever it’s called.
54. Emmett Manley
June 18, 2006
3:40 PM
I appreciate your reply, Brian - very few of use are called as or gifted specifically to be evangelists, yet we are all commanded, as regular Christians, to witness and share the gospel with all that we can. I’m sure convicted about it. I’m glad I’m not the only one! I want to do better.
Re: the foundation of a relationship between believers and non-believers…
I’ll give it a try - I heard John MacArthur explain fellowship in the context of I John 1:3 once, and remember some of it. Fellowship isn’t primarily a theological term - it is regularly used in both classic and common Greek literature. The overarching thought is to share in common, often “to share a common life”. Thayer’s Lexicon speaks of association, community, joint participation. And so fellowship exists on multiple levels. It can be the new life we have in Christ (as in I John 1:3), which is limited to regenerate folks, but it doesn’t have to mean that, linguistically or practically. All humans share much fellowship, the having of common, creation life, saved or lost. We have societal fellowship based on living and working in the same area, and national fellowship based on having citizenship in a common country. People who like the Braves share a common part of their life (“baseball life” :) ) and are in fellowship, on that level, with folks who also love the Braves!
Obviously, most of these are pretty superficial fellowships, and have no merit in themselves, but they may help serve as bridges or connecting points when we are out living among peope with whom we hope to share the gospel, see the Lord grant them salvation, and enter into a much deeper and richer fellowship as now we and they would then both belong to Christ.
For the Christian and non-Christian, the interesting point for evangelism (as mentioned in several good posts above) is where the “worlds” of the Christian and the non-Chrisitan intersect. Now that we are Christians, we have been immediately justified in our spirit, sins forgiven, righteousness imputed, and we have no fellowship with lost folk on that level, for we do not share a common life with them spiritually (i.e. Scriptures re: Christ and Belial, above). Between us and them, there is now a great gulf fixed - which we really, really want Christ to bridge, and to bring our lost friends to salvation. Next, as Christians, we are being progressively sanctified in our souls, and our mind, emotions and wills are being conformed to the image of His Son, by the Spirit life of: prayer, study of the Word, fellowship, preaching, etc. But as a consequence of being here on earth, we do, psychologically, still face many of the same mind, emotion, and will situations as our lost neighbors. We all worry about taxes, Al Quaida and the bird flu. One key area is in our bodies - our new life in Christ has made no difference whatsoever in our physical life, at this point. One day we’ll be glorified, but now we are corrupting at exactly the same rate as our lost neighbors. We see them regularly at the doctor and dentist - we have hope for a glorified body, but they do not - but that is in the future for us both. For now, we are in fellowship as having Adamic, corrupting physical life - with its sickness, limitations and sadness - with our non-Christian neighbors and friends.
Point? We have no spiritual fellowship with our lost friends. But we do have some soulish/psychological fellowship with them, still - and we have a tremendous amount of bodily/physical fellowship with them, since that part of our nature is exactly the same as them, for now.
Salvation is of the Lord. He uses believers, with new life in Christ radiating through the believer, as a canvas on which to both display and draw folks to saving knowledge and trust of His Son, Jesus Christ. Will being in contact with any light that God shines through us save them? No, not by itself - for blind eyes cannot see - but the same Lord that is giving us life, liberty, hope, holiness, visible to our neighbors - that same Lord is the convicter, convincer and converter, opening their eyes, presenting Christ, convicting them of the deadness and wrongness of their current life, drawing them to His Son - glory!
Practically, it DOES make a tremendous difference if someone shines for Christ in the midst of a dark world. And if that someone is kindly affectioned toward me - showing friendliness, empathy, sympathy and love toward me as a lost person, that is regularly, wonderfully used by God as opportunities are found to present the gospel, and to receive new life. That is most certainly how I was saved - God using some wonderful Christians to develop a relationship with me when I didn’t deserve it, and they would have been better off spiritually not to be within a thousand feet of me! (I was saved at 24 years old, and was an especially rotten person) Thank God for their kind hearts! The same God that prompted them to (yes) fellowship with me at the level of our common humanity used them as a great door open for me to hear the Gospel and be saved, much later. Now we have an altogether different type and level of fellowship! :)
Recognizing and developing appropriate (though obviously limited) fellowship on the above levels with lost folks whom we desperately want to see come to Christ gets us into position to be used of God when He moves in to save them - I like being part of the action, and I’m sure we all do!
Certainly, we must employ wisdom about the limits of such relationships (the boat must get in the water, but the water must not get into the boat!) - and Brian has outlined much of that danger for us in previous posts, all showing much wisdom - but we don’t want to err too much the other way, either. Separation, biblically - good. Isolation - no. We all know that.
P.S. The best witnessing/gospel presentation help for me has been Ray Comfort’s “The Way of the Master” series (www.wayofthemaster.com). We went through it at church, and I have used his wonderfully biblical and powerful approach to present the gospel and see God grant people salvation. I am going in an hour to continue to disciple a new believer who trusted Christ when I presented the gospel in this manner to him just two months ago, in March. He uses very creative methods to apply the Law of God, specifically the Ten Commandments and their deeper, spiritual analogues in the Sermon on the Mount, to people’s consciences. It is very thorough, and is recommended (see their website) by John MacArthur. It has really helped me, and allowed me to participate in winning souls to Christ, which I am naturally not very good at, apparently. I cannot recommend it too highly!
55. Brian Thornton
June 18, 2006
3:46 PM
Those in darkness hate the light, because it exposes their evil deeds. The relationships being described here between those of the light and those who walk in darkness cannot be reconciled with the truth of Scripture.
They are like oil and water…not only do they not mix…they CAN’T mix, not until such time as the water becomes oily, or the oil is transformed into water. In other words, either the unsaved person (who is walking in darkness) must move toward the light - which, according to Scripture does not happen except by the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit (resulting in the one walking in darkness becoming a child of light)…or, the one in the light must move toward the darkness, away from the light…resulting in compromise of the truth, compromise of witness, compromise of the gospel.
Sadly, it appears from these descriptions of “close”, “real”, “personal”, “meaningful” relationships that involve “fellowship” with the world, that personal experience trumps what the word of God infallibly teaches about the subject.
do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. - James 4:4
A believer can’t rub shoulders for very long with those in the world without either a)becoming worldy himself, or b)experiencing hostility and persecution for the name of Christ because of his stand on the truth of the gospel, and unwillingness to compromise and succomb to the temptations of the world. I fear that anything that happens in between of those two things may be a result of being lukewarm.
Are we to hole ourselves up somewhere so as not to come into contact with the world? No. Will we have aquaintences and associations with the world in our day-to-day living (at work, in the operations of a business, etc.)? Yes. Are we to invest time and energy building close, personal, meaningful, real relationsships with those in the world? Scripture seems abundantly clear that the answer is “No”…regardless of what our feelings or experiences tell us. Experience should never trump the objective truth of the Bible.
56. donsands
June 18, 2006
9:10 PM
“Experience should never trump the objective truth of God”
Amen! And double Amen!
I still disagree with you, but I shall take your thoughts to heart Brian.
57. Brian Thornton
June 18, 2006
9:40 PM
Emmett, thanks for your comments. One of the things you said was this:
P.S. The best witnessing/gospel presentation help for me has been Ray Comfort’s “The Way of the Master” series (www.wayofthemaster.com). We went through it at church, and I have used his wonderfully biblical and powerful approach to present the gospel and see God grant people salvation… He uses very creative methods to apply the Law of God, specifically the Ten Commandments and their deeper, spiritual analogues in the Sermon on the Mount, to people’s consciences.
I, too, am excited about what Way of the Master is doing. However, what they are doing is NOT just another “creative” method for evangelism. What they are doing is PURELY biblical…law and grace, law and grace, law and grace. Law to the proud…grace to the humble. The only thing that convicts is the law, and they have rediscovered that the good news of the cross is meaningless without the bad news that all stand condemned before a holy and just God who will judge the world in righteousness.
What they are doing is that simple…they are presenting a basic message that says you have broken God’s law and have no hope of reconciliation to the Father without faith alone in Jesus Christ, who came and died - fulfilling all righteousness - as a substitute for sinners.
What is interesting about their approach is that it involves NO prior relationship building…have you noticed that? It would seem that what they are doing sorta goes against some people’s line of thinking that a prior relationship somehow helps the gospel get accepted by those who have been befriended by believers prior to their conversion.
Anyway, thanks so much for your questions and comments. Grace and peace to you and yours.
58. Dave
June 26, 2006
7:04 PM
I have heard a little about “The way of the master”. It does seem to be decent at presenting evangelism.
I would also bring up the idea that a Christian cannot have a real relationship with an unbeliever if they do not feel for their position as lost. In what kind of relationship would a person keep what is needed most from someone who needs it most?
NO REAL ONE
Believers are able to relate only because they were once lost too. We must remeber this. This must be the root of evangelism. This kind of relationship between two people does not require a ‘prior relationship’ but an internal one. [This does not mean that a prior relationship would not serve to strengthen these aspects of preaching for some people.]
The point is how will someone convince another that they are lost if they don’t fully believe it and act accordingly themselves. Presenting the Gospel is not some aloof thing. It requires the evangelist to devote his whole heart and soul toward the endeavor. Paul even says that he travails until Christ be formed in you. (to the Corinithians?) This ‘travailing’ is related to having birthing pains.
I will also say it is not enough in evangelism to drop the G-bomb and run off thinking you have done your job. It is the other end oppose to just christian outreach. The point of evangelism is the evangelist is to place himself as a fork in the road in the unbeliever heart and present two paths. By God and the evangelist’s plea, the unbeliever may choose the right one. Yet, we are to also spread the seed widely and let it fall where it may. On rocky soil or on fertile soil.
This is the root of any meaningful relationship between a believer and unbeliever. Its foundation is the need of Christ and the ablity to sympathize with the unbeliever’s weaknesses as fellow man. I have yet to hear of any ‘work’ relationships outside of Christ as inherently meaningful.
Post Your Comment Here »